This all depends on the fact that the simulation and the real world are deterministic which, it would seem, is highly improbable.
This all depends on the fact that the simulation and the real world are deterministic which, it would seem, is highly improbable.
This doesn't change much, the problem irons its self out. I see no paradox. And I don't know what you see that makes determinism "seem improbable."
In this argument, every simulation would look into the future to see the lottery numbers, and would act out on this knowledge. There would be no "changing the future." Every simulation would see the lottery numbers, then see themselves go to the store and get a ticket with the numbers, and every simulation will win with those numbers. There was no other future. The future you see in the simulation is the future that will occur in your own simulation.
Calling this a paradox is like calling recursive mirrors a paradox.